that is happiness

"At any rate, that is happiness; to be dissolved into something complete and great. When it comes to one, it comes as naturally as sleep."
       -Willa Cather, My Antonia

Give Time or Money? Do Both.

A new report called "The Next Generation of American Giving: The Charitable Habits of Generations Y, X, Boomers, and Matures" was recently released by Blackbaud. While this survey size for this online study was a bit small, with 1,014 respondents, it did yield some interesting results, and a pretty cool infographic!

 The report touched on an issue that is near and dear to me... and my opinion on it probably will make me unpopular:

We asked donors which forms of support they feel makes the biggest difference for the causes that they support. Choices included monetary donations, volunteering, promoting causes by word of mouth, in-kind donations, policy advocacy, and fundraising on the causes' behalf.

According to Boomers and Matures, money matters most. Strong pluralities of Matures (48 percent) and Boomers (45 percent) say that monetary donations make the biggest difference. The focus on money declines with age: only 36 percent of Generation X and 25 percent of Generation Y think they can make the most difference by donating money. 

Conversely, Generation Y donors think they can make the biggest difference by volunteering (30 percent) and by spreading the word to others about the charity and its work (18 percent). But while they value volunteering, Gen Y donors are actually less likely than Matures to say they have actually volunteered for a cause in the past year. (p. 12)

Is it more important to donate your time or donate your money? I believe that both are absolutely valuable, and both are absolutely necessary.

Many charities could not survive without people who volunteer directly with clients (e.g. volunteers at a soup kitchen, a youth recreation program, etc.), volunteer on the board, or volunteer to be "raving fans" and community advocates for the cause, spreading the word to community leaders and to other potential volunteers and donors.

I can't think of any charities that could survive without monetary donations.

Yes, it's true that many in Generation Y have less disposable income than those in older generations. They are newer in their careers and may be paying off student loans. But that argument can extend to every generation:

• Gen X may *still* be paying off student loans, as well as new mortgages, childcare expenses, school tuitions or college costs for their kids, or the costs of launching businesses
• Baby Boomers may be paying (or paying off loans for) college tuitions, supporting elderly parents, supporting Gen Y children, and saving aggressively for retirement
• Matures may be living on fixed income and dealing with high healthcare costs

So, in a nutshell, I don't think the "we can't afford to give" argument cuts it, generally. Everyone has their financial burdens, and everyone makes choices about how to allocate their funds.

I think that one part of the problem may rest with charities and fundraisers themselves. People think that their gift only matters if it's large. I always talk to clients (the charitable organizations with which I consult) about encouraging their donors to make personally meaningful gifts. One person's $25 gift may be just as meaningful to them (and just as much of a stretch for them) as someone else's $2,500 or $25,000 gift. I don't think the charitable sector has, overall, done a good job of communicating this message.

This message matters because people need to get into a habit of giving in order for great charities to survive. Today's $25 donor becomes a $2,500 (or more) in 10 years. If you have never been in the habit of giving, it seems to me that you will be less likely to start giving later on.

I also am struck by the statistic on Gen Y and volunteering. Gen Y thinks they can make the biggest difference by volunteering, but they are less likely than Matures to say they have volunteered over the past year. Yes, Matures may be retired and have more free time. But the study doesn't say that they are less likely to report that they have volunteered over the past week, or the past month. It's the past YEAR. If you can't find one hour of time to donate over the course of a year, but you still say that you can make the biggest difference by volunteering... you're not walking the talk.

What is your take on some of these generational issues?

You can download the report by viewing the infographic and then filling out the form to get the whole report.

2013 charity stats from Giving USA

Charity Navigator's blog recently posted some items from Giving USA 2013, an annual report on philanthropy. A few fast facts that I thought were noteworthy, or that some folks might find surprising:

Individuals continue to give the largest percentage (72%) of charitable gifts. Individual giving increased over last year (3.9% increase), as did most other areas of giving (e.g. corporate giving and foundation giving).

The largest areas of giving continue to be Religion (typically, people giving to their places of worship) and Education. The Giving USA report notes that Arts & Culture is the fastest growing charitable cause.

Here's something that gave me pause from the Charity Navigator blog:

Total giving in 2012 was 8.2% below giving in 2007, before the charitable sector felt the effects of the recession. If the pace of growth in charitable giving stays constant in the coming years, giving will not rebound to pre-recession levels until 2018.

2018, people! That feels like a long way off. This somewhat daunting statistic probably is related to this:

Revised Giving USA data shows that total giving as a percentage of GDP has barely strayed from 2% over the past four decades despite the huge growth in the number of charities. This figure climbed to a high of 2.3% in 2000, but otherwise tends to gravitate to 2% of GDP.

So, there are more charities, but charitable giving has not increased as a percentage of GDP. What does this tell us? That, as a nation, we are stingy? I don't think so. Perhaps it tells us that the nonprofit marketplace is "clogged," and starting a new charity doesn't necessarily inspire people who are not giving to start giving (or those who are giving to give more). 

If giving isn't forecasted to return to pre-recession levels for a few more years... what's a nonprofit to do? So many nonprofits with which I work are focused on donor acquisition - attracting new donors who haven't given before. But few are really focused on donor retention - keeping your current donors on board, so they'll keep giving (and will increase their support). If we know that new nonprofits, or causes, aren't necessarily attracting more gifts, I think that (among other persuasive statistics) tell us that it's more important than ever to retain the donors you have, to keep them a "part of the family" and make sure your nonprofit stays relevant to them. 

Read more about these and other giving statistics in Giving USA 2013. 

The Overhead Myth

This letter has been generating lots of buzz on the internet... thank goodness!

The CEOs of Guidestar, Charity Navigator, and the BBB Wise Giving Alliance have written a letter asking people not to use overhead costs as the primary determinate of a charity's effectiveness. Check it out at overheadmyth.com.

They accurately point out that charities that scrimp on overhead expenditures suffer from:

• High staff turnover
• Inability to accurately monitor finances
• IT breakdowns, which causes downtime and limited information sharing
• Staff that is not as well trained as it should be
• Inability to fully track outcomes

... and lots of other issues. In addition, many organizations that are reporting low overhead costs on their IRS forms are doing so inaccurately.

There are so many other ways to make decisions about which charities to support. Such as:

• Is this charity doing something that matches my passions and interests?
• Is this charity doing something that few, if any, others are doing?
• Can this charity show results? Have they made a difference?
• Is this charity willing to take calculated risks, to really make a change?

So many of the nonprofits I work with do AMAZING work and have what some might consider high overhead costs, mainly because they have invested in their staff. I think that investing in effective staff who will stay with the organization long term is a great investment, one that ultimately benefits the nonprofit's clients.

My hero went back to school today

My hero Malala Yousufzai, went back to school today.

Do you know who Malala is? You should, but I don't blame you if you don't. This story has gotten so much less coverage in the media than so many other less deserving stories.

CLICK HERE to link to a Reuters article about Malala.

And here's an excerpt from the story. Read on for the definition of courage:

LONDON (Reuters) - Malala Yousufzai, the Pakistani girl who drew global attention after being shot in the head by the Taliban for advocating girls' education, returned to school on Tuesday in Britain where she has been treated for her injuries.

Yousufzai, 15, has become an international figure as a symbol of resistance to Taliban efforts to deny women's rights and is even among nominees for this year's Nobel Peace Prize.

A simple way to do a good deed

I volunteer at a hospital every Wednesday. This morning, when I walked into the waiting room, I saw the sweetest surprise: a basket full of get well cards and valentines made by school children. What a simple way to make someone's day. If you have kids in your life, you can encourage their class or club to do the same.

Creative Grant Writing Month!

Source: teacherspayteachers.com via JoAnn on Pinterest

As you may know, I'm fairly obsessed with the idea of grant writing as a creative pursuit. In fact, I just created an audio file, Grant Writing for Creative Souls, that celebrates this idea! This audio file includes 30 minutes of grant writing tips, creative writing exercises... and some pretty groovy music to set the mood.

A lot of people think of grant writing as a dry, stodgy pursuit. They think that the more big words you use, and the more boring the format, the more it sounds like a "real" proposal. I say... buck the trend!

In my experience, writing that is more lively, engaging, and creative is more likely to be remembered and more likely to be funded.

Now, that's not to say that you can write any old thing in a proposal and expect to get funded. Proposals should be put together in an organized structure with an impactful message that draws connections between the funder's interests and the needs being addressed. And the proposal is only half of the work - creating connections between the organization and the funder (e.g. foundation's program officer) is a HUGE part of creating lasting funding partnerships. But... I stand by my assertion that dry, boring grant writing does NOT = good grant writing.

Therefore, I have declared February CREATIVE GRANT WRITING MONTH! Every day, I will tweet one tip for creative grant writing, with the hashtag #creativegrantwriting (if I have room!). Hopefully, we will build a community of grant writers and fundraisers who share my belief that grant writing, and fundraising, does not have to be dry and boring - that creativity is actually an asset to fund development.

Please join the online conversation if you agree!

I left my magic fairy dust at home...

I saw a great article (or, rather, an opinion piece) in the Chronicle of Philanthropy today called "Development Directors are Not Miracle Workers." It was written by Rick Moyers, vice president of programs and communications at the Eugene and Agnes E. Meyer Foundation in Washington, DC. I think his concluding sentence really sums it all up:

The development director is only one factor in a complicated equation.

I've seen this phenomenon time and time again at nonprofits where I've worked and at nonprofits with which I've consulted. Things go well, and the Development Director gets little credit. Things don't go well, and the Development Director gets most or all of the blame. For a Development Director to be successful, lots of things need to be in place: a strong partnership between the Development Director and the Executive Director; an active and engaged board; supports for research, grantwriting, etc.; the Development Director's involvement in planning and budgeting; and much more.

Most importantly, Executive Directors and boards cannot see the Development Director as the person who will get them out of their responsibilities for fund development. Raising money for an organization is the job of EVERYONE in the organization, from the Executive Director to the Program Directors to the person who answers the organization's phones. It is especially incumbent upon the Executive Director and board to take lead roles in the fundraising process. When organizations see Development Directors (or development consultants) as the keepers of some magic fairy dust, which they can just sprinkle and the funding will appear, without the Executive Director or board having to be involved in the process... trouble is just around the corner.

I've also seen the flip side of this - Development Directors who are afraid to engage Executive Directors and boards, or who take on more administrative roles rather than actively cultivating donors (or helping Executive Directors and board members with cultivation).

Certainly, there are effective and ineffective Development Directors out there. But there are also many organizations that are quick to blame the Development Director when the picture is actually a bit more complex, and more revealing about the organization's overall health.

Keep. It. Simple.

I was pleased to see this article in The Chronicle of Philanthropy today, highlighting the importance of creating a clean, simple, concise tagline that describes your organization's work:

Can You Sum Up Your Charity's Work in One Simple Tagline?

The article highlights a few good examples:

Amnesty International: Exposing and preventing human-rights abuses
Habitat for Humanity: A world where everybody has a decent place to live
Southern Poverty Law Center: Fighting hate, teaching tolerance, seeking justice
World Wildlife Fund: Protecting the future of nature

This reminds me of an article I saw, and loved, in Nonprofit Quarterly called Mission Haiku: The Poetry of Mission Statements. 

Both of these articles highlight writing principles that I try to keep in mind:

Keep it simple.
Select words carefully.
Short sentences are powerful.

Do you have other examples of great nonprofit organizations' taglines?

A little New Year's Inspiration/Kick in the Pants

Source: moneysavingmom.com via Madison on Pinterest